Bombay High Court
Rahul Kalusing PawaraversusThe State of Maharashtra
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The writ petition is restored subject to the petitioners depositing Rs.7,500 as costs within the stipulated time.
Summary
The petitioners sought restoration of Writ Petition No. 16758 of 2023, which had been dismissed for alleged non‑removal of office objections. They contended that the petition had been properly registered and no objections existed, but argued that the court's earlier directions required compliance. The court examined the record and noted a 293‑day delay in filing the interim application. It concluded that restoration could not be granted merely on a simple basis and conditioned it on the payment of costs. Accordingly, the court ordered the petitioners to deposit Rs.7,500 with the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority within one week, after which the writ petition would be restored to its original file for admission on 23 September 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition dismissed for non‑removal of office objections can be restored despite a 293‑day delay in filing the interim application
- Whether the court may condition restoration on the payment of costs
Subjects
- restoration of writ petition
- office objections
- interim application
- costs
- procedural delay
Judgment
5_IA_13402_2025.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.13402 OF 2025
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 16758 OF 2023
Rahul Kalusing Pawara & Ors. ...Applicants
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
Rahul Kalusing Pawara & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
_______
Ms. Aasmi Patil i/by Talekar and Associates, for the Applicants.
Mr. B.V. Samant, Addl. GP a/w Ms. R.A. Salunkhe, AGP for Respondent - State.
_______
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 09th SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. Present Interim Application filed by the Applicant/Petitioner prays for
restoration of Writ Petition No.16758 of 2023, which came to be dismissed for
non-removal of office objections.
2. The case of the Applicant is that, in fact, the Petition was registered and
there were no office objections. However, considering the averments made in
Paragraph Nos.5 and 6 of the orders passed by this Court directing removal office
objections, the said order ought to have been complied with. There is also 293 days
delay in filing the present Application.
Page 1 of 2
Prasad
5_IA_13402_2025.DOC
3. Having perused the record as also the averments made in the application, in
the present facts of the case, restoration cannot be simplicitor granted. It would be
required to be granted subject to payment of costs. Let costs of Rs.7,500/- be
deposited with the office of the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority,
Mumbai as a condition for restoration of the petition. Let the said deposit be made
within a period of one week from today, subject to which the Petition stands
restored to its original file and record.
4. Interim Application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
5. List the proceedings for admission 23rd September 2026, subject to the
condition of payment of costs as a condition precedent.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Digitally signed
by PRASAD
PRASAD RAJENDRASING
RAJENDRASING RAJPUT
RAJPUT Date:
2026.09.16
20:10:58 +0530
Page 2 of 2
Prasad
Checking your session…